Press Monitoring September 8 to 15, 2014

Press Clippings for the period of September 8 to 15, 2014
Revue de presse pour la période du 8 au 15 septembre 2014
Here are a few articles and opinion pieces that might be of interest to AJC members
Voici quelques articles et chroniques d’opinion qui pourraient intéresser les membres de
l’AJJ
AJC in the news/L’AJJ fait les manchettes
Une hausse de 0,5 % offerte aux
fonctionnaires
Paul Gaboury, Le Droit, le 13 septembre 2014
C'est une hausse salariale de 0,5% par année pour chacune des quatre prochaines années
qui a été déposée par le gouvernement fédéral aux différentes tables de négociations,
incluant celles de l'Alliance de la fonction publique du Canada (AFPC).
Si les changements proposés par le gouvernement Harper pour modifier le régime de
congés de maladie ont suscité de vives réactions jusqu'à maintenant chez les syndicats
depuis mercredi, les offres monétaires déposées par le Conseil du Trésor risquent de
soulever tout autant la grogne à travers la fonction publique fédérale.
Larry Rousseau, le vice-président exécutif régional de l'AFPC, a indiqué que son syndicat
n'allait pas répliquer à cette proposition salariale pour l'instant. Il estime néanmoins que
la hausse qui est proposée représenterait une «baisse de salaire» pour ses membres
compte tenu de l'inflation.
L'AFPC a tenu des séances de négociations toute la semaine pour divers groupes
totalisant plus de 102 000 syndiqués. D'autres rencontres sont prévues au cours de
l'automne avec le Conseil du Trésor.
Dans son dernier budget, le gouvernement Harper avait annoncé le maintien du gel
pendant deux autres années (2014-2015) des budgets des ministères. Or, il avait aussi
précisé que les hausses salariales consenties aux employés devaient venir des budgets des
ministères.
Le gouvernement a l'habitude d'offrir une proposition de hausse salariale similaire à
toutes ses tables de négociations. Ce fut le cas lors de la dernière ronde et on peut
imaginer qu'il en sera de même cette fois-ci.
L'AFPC n'est pas le seul syndicat à avoir reçu une telle offre. Les 11 500 économistes
fédéraux représentés par l'Association canadienne des employés professionnels, ont reçu
la même proposition. Le syndicat souhaite obtenir des hausses annuelles salariales de
3,25% pour chacune des années de la convention collective de trois ans (2014, 2015,
2016). Les négociations pour ce groupe doivent reprendre la semaine prochaine à Ottawa.
Dans les dernières ententes négociées, le gouvernement fédéral avait déposé la même
offre à tous les employés fédéraux qui ont eu droit à des hausses identiques de 1,75%,
1,5% et 2% pour des ententes de trois ans. Ils avaient également tous perdu leur droit à
une indemnité de départ, autant les syndiqués que les non-syndiqués.
Congés de maladie: l'AJJ s'oppose aux changements
Les changements que le gouvernement veut apporter au régime de congés de maladie de
ses employés continuent à susciter de vives réactions chez les syndicats du secteur public
fédéral depuis qu'ils ont été révélés cette semaine aux tables de négociations.
Le gouvernement a proposé un nouveau régime qui accorde 37,5 heures par année de
congés de maladie (cinq jours au lieu de 15) et l'abolition des banques de congés de
maladie accumulés. Les employés auraient droit au régime d'assurance invalidité à court
terme après un délai d'attente de sept jours.
L'Association des juristes de justice, qui compte un effectif de 2 500 membres, la
proposition du gouvernement sur les congés de maladie «n'est pas acceptable à tous les
points de vue, avec moins de congés, aucun transfert de jours accumulés vers la
prochaine année et des lacunes dans la protection salariale», a-t-on précisé. «Nous
examinons cette offre attentivement, mais il est clair dès le départ que c'est une première
proposition qui n'est pas acceptable.»
Du côté de l'Association canadienne des employés professionnels (ACEP), un syndicat de
11 500 économistes et autres professionnels, la proposition sur les congés de maladie n'a
pas encore été reçue, mais on s'attend à ce que le Conseil du Trésor la dépose lors des
rencontres prévues la semaine prochaine. Au cours du printemps, l'ACEP avait été très
active dans ce dossier et avait préparé une campagne sur les «mythes» concernant le
régime actuel de congés de maladie des employés fédéraux.
------------------------
Clement wants to cut public
servants' sick days to five
KATHRYN MAY, Ottawa Citizen, September 11, 2014
The Conservative government proposes to slash public servants’ paid sick leave to five
days a year and introduce an unpaid seven-day waiting period before they qualify for new
short-term disability benefits.
Treasury Board negotiators presented the government’s long-awaited bargaining position
on a new sick-leave regime late Wednesday at closed-door talks with the giant Public
Service Alliance of Canada. PSAC is the largest federal union, representing the majority
of public servants in five large bargaining groups that have been locked in contract
negotiations with Treasury Board this week.
Under the proposal, the government wants to get rid of the accumulated sick-leave bank,
estimated to be worth about $5.2 billion in unused sick-leave credits. It also wants to
eliminate the 15 days of paid sick leave public servants now receive under their collective
agreements and replace that with five days, or 37.5 hours, a year.
PSAC President Robyn Benson said the union won’t entertain any proposal that demands
concessions on the existing sick-leave regime.
She argued the big concern about fewer sick days – combined with a waiting period for
short-term disability – is that public servants could end up going to work ill and making
their colleagues sick rather than staying at home, because they have run out of sick days.
“The bottom line in my humble opinion is this (means) ‘go-to-work-sick’ and that will be
the reality,” said Benson. “This government is telling their employees you have sick
leave in your collective agreements and we are going to take it and you can go to work
sick, be less productive and make everyone else sick and if you don’t go to work, then by
God, you won’t be able to feed your children.”
Benson said the government also expects public servants who borrow sick-leave credits
(because they don’t enough banked leave) to repay that advance later.
Under the existing contract, public servants can bank unused leave and roll it over yearto-year; bureaucrats have socked away thousands of hours over the years.
The five days of sick leave the government is now proposing cannot be accumulated and
carried over. Any unused days would disappear at the end of the year.
The government is calling for an unpaid, seven “calendar day” waiting period which
would kick in after public servants used all their allotted sick leave. After the waiting
period, employees would be eligible to apply for short-term disability, which would pay
benefits for up to 26 weeks.
Under the proposal, if they qualify for short-term disability, public servants can collect
full pay for four weeks. Pay drops to 70 per cent for the remainder of the 26 weeks.
Employees who are still unable to return to work after 130 days on short-term disability
will then go on long-term disability, under the government’s proposal.
With the government’s demands tabled, the pressure is on at the bargaining table. The
government wants the new short-term disability plan up and running by September, 2016.
Claude Poirier, president of the Canadian Association of Professional Employees, said he
was surprised that Treasury Board President Tony Clement, who is responsible for
bargaining, went so far in his demands, and expects his union will be presented with
“something very similar” when it resumes bargaining next month.
He argued the proposal flies in the face of Clement’s insistence that a new system was
necessary to protect workers who didn’t have enough banked leave to cover a prolonged
illness.
“Now, if you are sick twice a year you face seven days without pay before going on STD,
so when he pretends he is trying to help people without banked sick leave, he is lying.
This doesn’t help anyone,” Poirier said.
Bureaucrats offered Clement various options on how to overhaul the plan and the
proposal he selected was considered the “most transformative.” It also shows how willing
the government is to wage a major battle with unions in the run-up to the 2015 election.
The creation of a short-term disability plan is not part of negotiations as such. But the
number of sick days and ability to roll over unused days is enshrined in contracts and
must be re-negotiated.
The fate of banked sick leave was a big question hanging over this round of bargaining.
Public servants can’t cash in their unused sick leave when they retire and many leave
with weeks or months in their banks.
The government had commissioned an actuarial valuation of the $5.2 billion in banked
leave, which determined bureaucrats would only use about $1.4 billion worth of the
unused leave. That $1.4 billion, recorded as a liability on the government’s books, will
disappear if banked sick leave is abolished.
Many hoped Clement would allow some, if not all, to be carried over so employees could
dip into their credits for extra leave if they needed more than the new five-day threshold.
Canada Post did this when it revamped its sick leave.
Collective bargaining has been underway for months as union and Treasury Board
negotiators traded demands but PSAC is the first union to receive the sick-leave proposal.
Benson met Thursday with leaders of the other 16 unions to discuss next steps.
Although the various unions negotiate with the government separately from each other,
the unions have signed a “solidarity” pact to present a common front on sick leave.
Clement has so far shown no openness to the union’s position that the existing system
should be fixed rather than replaced with a new short-term disability plan.
He originally said he was open to their input and the main reason for the government’s
delay in unveiling its position was unions’ refusal to participate in “informal” discussions
– which were to be held outside the collective bargaining process – on the broad shape of
the new short-term and long-term disability plans.
Clement said once the unions “categorically’ rejected his offer for discussions, Treasury
Board was forced “back to the drawing board’’ to draft its own proposal without their
input.
The proposal at a glance
Treasury Board President Tony Clement wants to replace the existing accumulated sickleave regime in Canada’s public service with a new short-term disability plan in 2016.
Here’s a look at what could change:
Sick-leave bank
$5.2 B: Current value of total banked or unused sick leave.
$0: What would remain in sick-leave bank, under the government’s scenario, after
government abolishes sick-leave credits as part of a new short-term disability plan.
Sick Days
15: Current number of paid sick days to which public servants are annually entitled under
existing collective agreements. Unused days can be banked and carried over year to year.
5: Number of paid sick-leave days every year under the government’s proposal. Unused
days would be lost and couldn’t be banked.
Waiting Period
13: Number of weeks public servants currently must wait to qualify for long-term
disability. They can use banked sick leave to collect full pay during the waiting period –
if they have banked leave.
7: Under the government’s proposal, number of “calendar” days, unpaid, that public
servants would wait before they can qualify for short-term disability once they use up the
five days of paid sick leave they would get.
Pay
100 per cent: Public servants currently get full pay when ill as long as they have enough
banked sick leave to cover their absences. Employees now qualify for long-term
disability – at 70 per cent of pay – after 13 weeks or after using all their sick leave.
70 to 100 per cent – Under the government proposal, employees on short-term disability
would receive full pay for four weeks, then 70 per cent of salary for the remaining 22
weeks. Long-term disability would kick in after that.
11: Average number of sick days public servants now take annually.
-----------------------------------------
Cinq jours de maladie par année
pour les fonctionnaires
Paul Gaboury, Le Droit, le 11 septembre 2014
Le gouvernement Harper réservait une surprise de taille à ses employés syndiqués,
mercredi, à la reprise des négociations dans le secteur public fédéral : les banques de
congés de maladie accumulés au fil des ans par les fonctionnaires fédéraux seront abolies
et le nouveau régime d'assurance invalidité prévoira que chaque employé aura dorénavant
droit à cinq jours de maladie par année.
Ces deux mesures sont précisées dans des documents officiels du Conseil du Trésor dont
LeDroit a pu prendre connaissance.
Depuis que le gouvernement Harper avait annoncé son intention de modifier le régime de
congés de maladie, bien des fonctionnaires se demandaient ce qu'il adviendrait de leur
banque de congés de maladie accumulés.
Et le gouvernement n'avait pas vraiment indiqué combien de journées ou d'heures il
accorderait à ses employés pour les absences liées à la maladie.
« À partir de la date de la mise en oeuvre du régime d'assurance-invalidité, tous les
crédits de congé de maladie accumulés à cette date seront abolis », lit-on à l'article 35.01
du document governemental.
Il est aussi indiqué qu'à la date de la mise en oeuvre du nouveau régime d'invalidité à
court terme, chaque employé aura droit à 37,5 heures par année dès le 1e jour de l'année
financière. Pour les employés embauchés pendant l'année, le calcul sera fait au prorata.
Ces heures viendront ainsi remplacer le régime actuel de 12 journées de maladie par
année, ou 90 heures, qu'un employé pouvait emmagasiner dans une banque de congés de
maladie, une banque qu'il perdait à son départ ou à la retraite.
Le document précise également que l'employé incapable d'exercer ses fonctions « devra
convaincre l'Employeur de son état de la façon et au moment que ce dernier détermine ».
Selon nos informations, la période de carence pour obtenir l'assurance-invalidité à court
terme sera de 7 jours. Si bien qu'un employé ayant écoulé ses 37,5 heures de maladie
dans l'année et qui tombe de nouveau malade pendant l'année, devra attendre sept jours
avant de pouvoir réclamer des prestations du régime d'assurance-invalidité à court terme.
Il pourrait donc se retrouver sans paie pendant ces journées d'absence.
Les détails révélés dans le document risquent de susciter la grogne des syndicats du
secteur public fédéral, d'autant plus que le régime proposé est encore moins généreux que
celui accepté lors de la dernière ronde de négociations à Postes Canada.
--------------------------------------
Congés de maladie des fonctionnaires fédéraux
«Une autre manifestation de mépris du
gouvernement», dénonce l'AFPC
Paul Gaboury, Le Droit, le 11 septembre 2014
Les mesures présentées sur les congés de maladie dans la fonction publique par le
gouvernement fédéral forceraient les fonctionnaires «à choisir entre rentrer au travail
quand ils sont malades» et «subir une perte de revenu», soutient l'Alliance de la fonction
publique du Canada.
«Au lieu de promouvoir un milieu de travail sain, le gouvernement manifeste encore une
fois son mépris pour ses travailleurs et travailleuses et pour les services publics en
général, a déclaré Robyn Benson, présidente nationale de l'AFPC. Nous ne sommes pas
prêts à considérer une proposition qui affaiblit les services publics ou les conditions de
travail de nos membres.»
Lors des négociations avec l'AFPC cette semaine, le Conseil du trésor a déposé les détails
au sujet du nouveau régime d'assurance-invalidité à court terme qui viendrait remplacer
les dispositions actuelles sur les congés de maladie.
En vertu des documents dont nous avons pu prendre connaissance mercredi et publiés en
exclusivité dans notre édition de jeudi, la proposition éliminerait tous les crédits de congé
de maladie accumulés des fonctionnaires, réduirait à 37,5 heures par année l'allocation
pour congé de maladie qui serait assujettie à la discrétion unique de l'employeur. De plus,
le nouveau régime proposé prévoit une période d'attente non payée de sept jours pour
avoir droit à l'indemnité d'invalidité de courte durée.
Selon le syndicat, le gouvernement propose avec ces mesures «de retirer des conventions
collectives un important avantage négocié».
Pour la suite des négociations, l'AFPC indique qu'elle continuera de mettre l'accent sur
des mesures «pour améliorer les conditions de travail de ses membres» et pour faire des
milieux de travail «efficaces et sains».
Depuis plusieurs mois, l'AFPC avait fait valoir qu'elle allait s'opposer à l'instauration d'un
régime d'assurance-invalidité à court terme dont les grandes lignes ont été révélées par le
gouvernement avant le début des négociations dans des documents officiels en janvier, et
dans une mise à jour en juin.
Certains détails importants touchant les banques de congés accumulés et le nombre de
journées de maladie annuels ont été confirmés aux tables de négociations mercredi lors
de la reprise des négociations avec l'AFPC. En juillet dernier, les deux parties s'étaient
laissées après avoir échangé de l'information. La question des salaires n'avait alors pas
encore été abordée.
Selon les données du Conseil du Trésor, les fonctionnaires prennent en moyenne 11,11
jours de maladie payés par année et 6,85 jours non payés.
De façon générale, les employés fédéraux ont droit à 1,25 jours de maladie par mois (15
jours par année et non 12 jours tel qu'écrit hier). Les conventions collectives des
employés fédéraux prévoient ainsi, selon le régime actuel, qu'un employé acquiert ainsi
des crédits de congé de maladie à raison de 9,375 heures pour chaque mois civil pendant
lequel il touche la rémunération d'au moins 75 heures.
Ces congés non utilisés peuvent être accumulés dans une banque que l'employé perd à
son départ ou à la retraite.
En février dernier, une étude du directeur parlementaire du budget avait révélé que les
congés de maladie payés dans la fonction publique fédérale s'étaient chiffrés à 871
millions $ en 2011-2012.
Toutefois, une analyse plus poussée dévoilée en juillet dernier par son bureau avait révélé
que les congés de maladie ne représentaient pas de coûts significatifs dans les ministères
principalement parce que les fonctionnaires absents pour maladie ne sont tout simplement
pas remplacés. L'étude avait étudié l'impact financier des congés de maladie dans vingt
ministères fédéraux.
Les syndicats avaient alors mentionné que le document allait leur servir dans leurs
négociations avec le gouvernement qui soutient que les employés fédéraux s'absentent
trop souvent du travail par rapport aux employés du secteur privé.
------------------------------
Des fonctionnaires au travail même
malades?
Radio-Canada Ottawa-Gatineau, le 11 septembre 2014
Le gouvernement fédéral veut réduire le nombre de jours de congé de maladie auxquels
ses employés ont droit, confirme l'Alliance de la fonction publique du Canada (AFPC),
qui a repris ses négociations avec la partie patronale, mercredi.
Actuellement, les membres de l'AFPC acquièrent 9,375 heures de congé de maladie par
mois, soit 15 jours par année.
Selon le syndicat, les nouvelles règles feraient en sorte que les fonctionnaires fédéraux
auraient dorénavant droit à cinq jours (37,5 heures) de congé de maladie annuellement.
Cette indemnité serait assujettie à la discrétion de l'employeur, qui pourrait refuser
d'accorder un congé à un employé.
Si le Conseil du Trésor obtient gain de cause, la banque de congés accumulés serait
également abolie et un nouveau régime d'assurance invalidité serait créé. Un
fonctionnaire devrait toutefois attendre pendant sept jours, sans rémunération, avant
d'avoir droit à l'indemnité d'invalidité de courte durée.
L'AFPC dénonce les mesures proposées. « Si les mesures envisagées sont adoptées, les
fonctionnaires seront forcés de choisir entre rentrer au travail quand ils sont malades et
subir une perte de revenu qu'ils pourraient utiliser pour payer des besoins de base »,
explique le syndicat dans un communiqué.
Le vice-président exécutif régional de l'AFPC s'est fait tout aussi alarmant. Larry
Rousseau a toutefois précisé que le contenu des négociations est normalement
confidentiel.
« Je peux comprendre que, finalement, ça sort un peu, parce que tout le monde en parle »,
a-t-il dit. « Ça a eu l'effet d'une bombe. »
Selon M. Rousseau, les mesures proposées par le gouvernement fédéral signeraient l'arrêt
de mort du régime actuel de congés, ce qui « est non négociable » pour lui.
Sans vouloir révéler la teneur exacte des discussions, il dit que son syndicat est prêt à
négocier des améliorations aux règles déjà en place et que l'AFPC analysera les
propositions du gouvernement afin de revenir à la table des négociations avec une
position détaillée.
Larry Rousseau souligne par ailleurs que les « abus » souvent dénoncés par le
gouvernement sont approuvés par un gestionnaire de la fonction publique et qu'il ne faut
donc pas blâmer les syndicats.
----------------------------------------------------
Clement wants public service contracts
signed before next election
Elizabeth Thompson, iPolitics, September 11, 2014
Treasury Board President Tony Clement says he wants to conclude negotiations with
unions representing tens of thousands of federal public servants before the next federal
election.
Asked during an interview with iPolitics whether Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s
government can go into the next election, slated for October 2015, with labor contracts
unsigned, Clement was blunt.
“I don’t think that’s reasonable,” he replied. “Within the next 12 months, we should be
able to find some solutions.”
Clement was even more blunt when asked about the possibility that some unions would
prefer to negotiate a contract with a successor to the Harper government.
“Well, they’re not going to have that opportunity, so I would suggest that they get down
to brass tacks right now.”
Clement’s comments come as the government and the unions that represent nearly
200,000 federal public servants have begun what are expected to be tough negotiations to
renew collective agreements.
They also come amid concerns on the part of a number of union leaders that the
government will provoke a crisis or a strike in order to boost its popularity and increase
its chances of being re-elected.
Clement dismisses the suggestion.
“When people strike it’s because the union decides to strike – not because the
management decides to strike.”
“I am going to continue to offer fair and reasonable solutions and my place to do that is at
the bargaining table,” he added. “I hope and expect and desire to have an interlocutor or
series of interlocutors who will take my concerns seriously on behalf of the taxpayer and
government. Hopefully we can find the magic formula that will get us to the solutions.”
If anyone is playing politics, it is the unions, Clement suggested.
“There has been a lot of rhetorical flourish, shall we say, on their side. I have noticed they
have really ramped that up. I guess that’s the political context of this. They have allies in
the NDP and to some extent with the Liberal party as well, so they will try to use every
lever at their disposal to leverage what they see as their preferred solutions.”
“But I have a joint, dual responsibility, that is to say that I want to make sure that our
employees are looked after in a fair and reasonable way but at the same time it has to be
an accountable system for the taxpayer.”
Clement also vowed not to bow to intimidation such as the demonstration in front of his
Port Sydney home recently by more than 100 federal corrections officers protesting the
government’s proposal to overhaul the federal government’s sick leave regime.
“I think it is important that this kind of activity not be rewarded by having an impact on
what I’m going to be presenting at the bargaining table. I try to ignore that and keep
focused on what my job is.”
Most of the government’s collective agreements have expired and most of those that
remain in effect are up by the end of the year.
Talks are off to a slow start, in part because the government has not yet tipped its hand on
a couple of fronts. Most departments have not revealed which jobs they plan to designate
as “essential” in the event of a strike or job action and while some negotiators have had
informal conversations, unions have still not received the details of its plan to overhaul
the public service’s system of sick days.
Clement wants to replace the existing system of bankable sick days with a smaller
number of sick days coupled with a short-term disability plan.
Public service unions have vowed to work together to fight Clement’s plan.
Exceptionally, they are working together and pooling their resources. While each union
will still bargain separately, they are sharing things like research and information.
Clement said he would have preferred to work informally with public service unions to
come up with a new sick leave regime and the refusal by the unions to discuss a new sick
leave system anywhere but the bargaining table has resulted in talks to renew 27
collective agreements getting off to a slow start.
“We had tried to engage them in trying to get their advice on how to devise a new system
that would replace the banks of days with a more commonly found short term disability
plan that is more common in other public sectors as well as the private sector.”
“The unions, obviously, made a tactical decision that no union was going to have that
discussion with us. So, now we are at the stage where we are having to fashion what we
think is a fair and reasonable new system without their input at the front end and so
obviously that will prolong bargaining at the back end.”
Clement did not give any indication of when he plans to table his proposal.
Clement said overhauling the public service sick leave system is the key question at stake
in these negotiations.
“What’s at stake…is having a system that is more modern, that will have a better handle
on mental wellness and mental illness issues, that will make sure that employees have the
care they need to get back to work healthier, sooner. Obviously, from the taxpayer view,
we want to reduce absenteeism. In the case of individuals who are taking advantage of
the system, we want to reduce that and have a system in place to help people when they
are sick.”
“That’s what’s at stake. I think it’s important if we are going to have a productive
workforce, a happy workforce of people who are motivated to come to work that we do
change the system.”
------------------------
What to expect from Parliament’s fall
session
JOSH WINGROVE, The Globe and Mail, September 14, 2014
MPs are heading back to Ottawa this week – with Parliament’s fall session expected to
focus largely on holdover issues from the spring, including prostitution, cyber-bullying
and free trade.
Some new bills are expected, including one enacting parts of the budget, but opposition
parties say the government has run out of steam ahead of next year’s scheduled election.
Government House Leader Peter Van Loan shrugged off the criticism. “We have made
great progress, but there’s still a lot to keep us busy. The focus will continue to be the
economy, job creation, and that will probably intensify as we go through the fall,” he
said. Here’s what to expect:
New stuff, but not CETA
The foremost new offering is expected to be the Budget Implementation Act (BIA),
putting spending plans into law, including Finance Minister Joe Oliver’s small-business
job credit. In the past, BIAs have drawn criticism for being packed with unrelated
measures. Government House Leader Peter Van Loan said the government’s focus is the
economy and jobs, but that the act will reflect previous ones. “I sense it’s more business
as usual,” he said of the BIA.
A law implementing a free-trade deal with South Korea is expected this fall, Mr. Van
Loan said, although it is unclear whether a law implementing the European Union trade
deal known as CETA will follow suit. “Obviously, that’s a very big and complex
agreement, so the sooner we can get it to the House, the better. It’s too soon to say at this
point in time,” Mr. Van Loan said.
NDP House Leader Peter Julian said the Conservatives are “just a tired, fatigued
government, and what they seem to want to do is introduce legislation that’s more an
attempt to kind of appeal to their base more than anything else.” Liberal House Leader
Dominic LeBlanc said not much is coming down the pipe. “They’re coming back with an
empty slate, in terms of substantive stuff,” he said.
The leftovers
Some bills interrupted by the summer break will resume their path to becoming law. One
already has: C-36, the government’s anti-prostitution law tabled after the Supreme Court
struck down existing laws last December. Committee hearings continued through the
break. The current laws expire in three months, and Mr. Van Loan said the new one will
be passed by then.
Another is Bill C-13, the anti-cyberbullying law, which also includes new police
surveillance powers that have drawn criticism from civil libertarians and others. Mr. Van
Loan hopes to get C-13 “through and out of” the House of Commons this fall.
Other holdovers include minor bills, including those on nuclear liability, reducing red
tape, a victims’ bill of rights, priority hiring for veterans, counterfeit products and raising
penalties for hurting a police service animal.
Finally, Conservative backbencher Michael Chong’s private member’s bill, the Reform
Act, which reins in party leaders and empowers individual MPs – is due for second
reading this month. Mr. Chong has twice amended it to boost its chances of passing, but
its fate is unclear.
Duffy and the Senate
Mike Duffy’s case is scheduled to go to court on Sept. 16, the second day of Parliament’s
fall session. RCMP have laid 31 charges against the suspended senator over his expense
claims and a deal struck with Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s former chief of staff Nigel
Wright, who wrote Mr. Duffy a $90,000 cheque. The Senate scandal left Mr. Harper on
the defensive for much of the past year, and Mr. Duffy’s legal proceedings will keep it in
the headlines.
Mr. Harper has avoided appointing senators since the scandal erupted. Openings have
mounted – the 105-seat chamber has 14 empty seats now, with three more retirements
due this fall.
One Senate bill, however, is not due to become law soon. Mr. Van Loan said it is too
early to say whether the Digital Privacy Act, Bill S-4, will make progress in the House
this fall.
Iraq, the opposition and watchdogs
The Liberals will ask for Parliament to be briefed on Canada’s deployment of soldiers to
Iraq, a request that comes after the Defence and Foreign Affairs ministers appeared
before a committee last week. Mr. LeBlanc also called for more details on free-trade
agreements, which the Prime Minister has hailed as a key achievement.
NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair will return to Question Period, where he has drawn strong
reviews, with his Official Opposition NDP trailing the Liberals in the polls. The NDP’s
Mr. Julian called on government to “change the tone” in the House and work more
collaboratively with the opposition. “We’ll continue to be a very spirited and hardworking opposition,” he said.
The Conservatives face reports from Parliament’s spending watchdog, the Parliamentary
Budget Officer, who frequently questions the government’s spending. The PBO plans to
release several reports in the coming months, including the annual fiscal sustainability
report, an analysis of the “merits and risks” of the government’s proposed balanced
budget law, a mid-year economic and fiscal outlook and the PBO’s annual report, due in
November.
Pre-campaign season
The election is due next October, and the politicking has already begun. Mr. Van Loan
said the government’s focus on the economy will help contrast “the proven, experienced
strong leadership of Stephen Harper” against Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau. He brushed
aside the possibility of holding the vote earlier than the legislated Oct. 19, 2015. “I’ve
heard nothing to suggest otherwise, and certainly I haven’t been planning otherwise,” he
said.
Mr. Julian said the NDP will continue to reveal key planks of their election platform.
“We’ll be playing a key role as government in waiting, and that’s where we start to roll
out, as Tom Mulcair has, what we’d actually be doing as government so Canadians can
see,” he said.
Mr. LeBlanc expects the Conservatives to focus on balancing the budget, which the
Liberals have argued was done in part by delaying key infrastructure spending. “It’ll sort
of be like George Bush on the deck of the aircraft carrier, ‘Mission accomplished.’ I fully
expect Joe Oliver to have a ‘mission accomplished’ sign on the deck of some frigate,”
Mr. LeBlanc said.
The House of Commons’ fall sitting is scheduled to total 11 weeks.
------------------------------------------------
Une longue campagne de séduction
débute
JOËL-DENIS BELLAVANCE, La Presse, le 15 septembre 2014
(Ottawa) La santé de l'économie canadienne, l'utilisation des surplus à venir, la
participation du Canada à la coalition internationale menée par les États-Unis pour
combattre les djihadistes de l'État islamique (EI) et le scandale des dépenses au Sénat
feront partie des enjeux qui soulèveront les passions à la Chambre des communes, qui
reprend ses travaux aujourd'hui après une pause estivale de 10 semaines.
Mais tous les députés sont conscients que la reprise des travaux marque aussi le début
d'une longue campagne de séduction des électeurs puisque les prochaines élections
doivent avoir lieu le 19 octobre 2015, dans environ 13 mois.
Les leaders des trois principaux partis aux Communes - le premier ministre Stephen
Harper, le chef du NPD, Thomas Mulcair, et le chef du Parti libéral, Justin Trudeau - se
comportent comme si la campagne électorale était déjà lancée.
Stephen Harper, qui occupe toute la place dans une nouvelle offensive publicitaire des
conservateurs vantant les qualités de gestionnaire du premier ministre, annoncera les
priorités de son gouvernement pour les prochains mois ce matin devant des centaines de
militants réunis au Centre des congrès d'Ottawa. L'économie, la réduction du fardeau
fiscal des contribuables et la lutte contre la criminalité seront évidemment au coeur de ses
priorités.
Thomas Mulcair a commencé à dévoiler les principaux éléments du programme de sa
formation politique à un an des élections. Après avoir promis la création d'un programme
national de garderies, M. Mulcair a confirmé samedi à Vancouver qu'un gouvernement
néo-démocrate rétablirait le salaire minimum pour les employés qui travaillent pour des
entreprises sous la houlette d'Ottawa, comme les banques et celles du domaine des
télécommunications. Le salaire minimum serait de 15$ d'ici la fin d'un premier mandat du
NPD. M. Mulcair passera aussi plus de temps à l'extérieur des Communes pour courtiser
les électeurs et expliquer le programme de son parti.
En tête dans les sondages nationaux depuis 16 mois, les libéraux de Justin Trudeau
continueront leur campagne de charme auprès des Canadiens, à fignoler leurs promesses
électorales et à recruter des candidats en prévision du rendez-vous électoral d'octobre
2015. Il n'est pas question pour le moment de divulguer certains engagements. Les
libéraux s'attendent à être l'objet de toutes les attaques d'ici au déclenchement officiel des
élections.
«Pour nous, ce n'est pas juste une session parlementaire qui commence, c'est le début de
la campagne électorale. Il est assez clair que tout geste posé par le gouvernement, tout
geste posé par l'opposition va toujours être mesuré à l'aune d'une évaluation par l'électorat
pour savoir qui est mieux placé pour gouverner le pays», a affirmé le chef du NPD,
Thomas Mulcair, dans une entrevue avec La Presse.
La création d'emplois, une priorité
Le leader du gouvernement en Chambre, Peter Van Loan, a indiqué dimanche que la
priorité absolue des conservateurs durant la session automnale sera la création d'emplois.
«Alors que l'économie mondiale reste fragile et que des tensions géopolitiques
déstabilisent la croissance économique, notre gouvernement va poursuivre son bilan de
création d'emplois», a dit le ministre, précisant que les accords de libre-échange entre le
Canada et l'Union européenne ainsi que celui entre le Canada et la Corée du Sud
devraient être soumis au Parlement.
Même si des surplus pointent à l'horizon, il est hors de question de se lancer dans de
grandes dépenses, a fait savoir M. Van Loan. Les surplus à venir seront utilisés en bonne
partie pour réduire le fardeau fiscal des familles canadiennes.
«Alors que notre gouvernement conservateur se concentre sur l'économie, Justin Trudeau
et Thomas Mulcair ont le même vieil ordre du jour de taxes, d'impôts et de dépenses
élevés, qui freinera la création d'emplois et augmentera les coûts pour les familles qui
travaillent fort», a-t-il dit.
Dès ce soir, les députés pourraient participer à un débat d'urgence sur le rôle que devrait
jouer le Canada dans l'offensive que s'apprêtent à lancer les États-Unis contre l'EI.
Il y a deux semaines, le premier ministre Stephen Harper a confirmé, alors qu'il
participait à un sommet de l'OTAN, que le Canada déploiera plusieurs dizaines de soldats
en Irak afin de conseiller le gouvernement en place sur les mesures à prendre pour mieux
protéger les citoyens irakiens contre les attaques des terroristes de l'EI.
Le scandale des dépenses au Sénat pourrait revenir hanter le gouvernement Harper cet
automne, car le vérificateur général Michael Ferguson doit déposer son rapport
examinant l'ensemble des dépenses des sénateurs. La cause du sénateur Mike Duffy, qui
fait face à plusieurs accusations de fraude et d'abus de confiance, sera de retour devant les
tribunaux demain.
-----------------------------
Balanced budget law promised as
House of Commons resumes
BY JASON FEKETE, OTTAWA CITIZEN, SEPTEMBER 14, 2014
As Parliament returns Monday, the Conservative government is preparing legislation to
address the Canada-U.S. price gap, and also promising a bill that would demand federal
governments balance the budget during “normal economic times.”
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government will also look to pass legislation this fall on
the Canada-Korea free-trade deal, and a separate bill is expected in the coming months
for the Canada-EU free-trade agreement that was recently finalized by both sides.
Several significant promises from the Conservative government’s fall 2013 throne speech
still must be introduced before Canadians go to the polls in October 2015.
Harper’s government has vowed to balance the books in 2015 — just in time for the
election — and plans to introduce legislation that will require balanced budgets “during
normal economic times.” The balanced budget law will also include “concrete timelines
for returning to balance in the event of an economic crisis,” according to the throne
speech.
“We anticipate that we’ll carry through on our throne speech commitments and that
(balanced budget legislation) was one of them,” Government House leader Peter Van
Loan told the Citizen.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer is expected to release a report this week on the benefits
and drawbacks of balanced budget legislation and its effectiveness in Canada.
Provincial governments have increasingly moved toward balanced budget legislation
over the past few decades, but haven’t always stuck to the law.
Alberta, for example, introduced similar legislation in the 1990s to demonstrate it was
committed to fiscal responsibility, but the Conservative government in that province was
forced to amend it and sink back into deficit during the economic downturn.
The balanced budget bill will be part of a series of measures designed to present the
Conservatives as competent economic managers who can be trusted with the federal
purse.
At the same time, Finance Minister Joe Oliver is mulling personal tax breaks in the 2015
budget, as the government projects a $6.4-billion surplus in 2015-16.
Look for the government to introduce in the fall additional consumer-themed measures,
including legislation designed to tackle the Canada-U.S. price gap.
It’s unclear exactly how the government plans to deal with what it calls “geographic price
discrimination,” but it has promised to introduce legislation to address price gaps that are
not justified by higher operating costs in Canada. The Competition Bureau will be called
on to enforce the new laws.
Federal legislation is also in the works to end pay-to-pay bill policies, which see
customers charged extra to receive their monthly bills on paper.
“The price gap legislation is something where I do think you may see some action in the
fall,” Van Loan said.
Free trade will also dominate much of the government’s legislative agenda.
The Conservatives plans on introducing bills to pass the Canada-Korea and CanadaEuropean Union free-trade agreements.
The Canada-Korea deal was announced last March (with a copy of the text tabled in the
House of Commons in June), while the text of the Canada-EU deal was finalized in
August. Korean President Park Geun-hye will make a state visit to Ottawa Sept. 20 to 22
and, along with Harper, will trumpet the Canada-Korea trade agreement.
However, the Canada-EU deal — known as the Comprehensive Economic and Trade
Agreement (CETA) — still faces hurdles before it can become law. The pact still must
undergo a legal examination and translation, then be formally approved by the EU’s 28
member states.
The prime minister is hosting a Canada-EU summit in late September that is expected to
be attended by European Commission President José Manuel Barroso.
“Canada-Korea is one I foresee in the fall (for legislation). It may take a little longer for
Canada-Europe. It’s a very large and comprehensive agreement,” Van Loan said.
-------------------------------------
Why this Parliament is all about the
next election
Campbell Clark, Columnist for The Globe and Mail, September 15, 2014
When Justin Trudeau got onstage in Markham Friday night and told his audience of
Ontario Liberals that someone had asked him if the election campaign had already begun,
they all laughed. “I think you know the answer,” he said.
It’s obvious to the parties. The election year – Canada’s first, made inevitable by the
fixed election date law that sets an October, 2015, vote – is here.
This week marks the opening of the election Parliament, the session that will build
toward Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s real election platform, in a budget, then segue to
a sprint to the official campaign. And a little urgency has come from opposition fears that
Mr. Harper might still call a snap spring election.
Mr. Trudeau has been touring towns like he’s already on the hustings, while the
Conservatives and NDP, with bigger caucuses, chastized him for skipping Parliament and
ridiculed him as an empty suit. Now it’s those parties, behind in the polls, who plan to
emulate some of his tactics, and who will really move up the campaigning.
While the Tories long ago imported permanent political advertising to Canada, it’s the
NDP that really fired the starting gun on the election year, fearing it might fall out of the
race. At 19-per-cent support, according to an average of polls by threehundredeight.com,
the party feared being written off as unable to take power long before the official writ
period.
So Thomas Mulcair will take to the road more, too, and has already launched a slogan,
Change That’s Ready, with a shot at Mr. Trudeau as callow. And he’s unveiling his
election platform early, promising a child-care plan and a $15-an-hour federal minimum
wage.
The political goal isn’t really to have Mr. Mulcair define NDP policies. The policies are
to define the leader. Most people outside Quebec have a vague sense of Mr. Mulcair –
and voters make their choice around the leader. The policies are to sharpen the image: a
child-care plan, for example, is to say he cares about parents and children.
Mr. Harper, meanwhile, knows what he has to talk about – and it can’t be election
promises. Prime ministers have advantages, but after a decade in power, their promises
tend to be greeted with a question: Why haven’t you done this already?
That’s why Mr. Harper’s election platform has to be rooted in what he’s done in
government, and the main chapter will be the budget. With surpluses, he can offer new
initiatives, and big tax cuts – and dare opponents to say they’d undo them.
Mr. Harper’s aides say he’ll get out of Ottawa more, too. But Finance Minister Joe Oliver
already offered a taste of the election theme, crafted from government, last week, when
he announced a credit to reduce EI premiums for small businesses. The message is that
the rewards of fiscal prudence are going to be reaped, and used to strengthen the
economy.
The Conservative Party can use its money edge to advertise, as they’ve already attacked
“in over his head” Justin Trudeau for promising to legalize pot. And the PM controls
levers in Parliament he can use to tell voters he’s the leader with experience, and the
issue is the economy – like a tax-cutting budget.
Mr. Trudeau insists he’s itching for that kind of election. “It’s not going to be about pot.
It’s not going to be about who has the nicest hair. The next election is going to be about
the economy, because that’s what’s concerning Canadians,” he told students at Fanshawe
College in London, Ont., on Thursday.
While his opponents attack him for lack of detail, he has set a pretty clear frame for the
election: He’ll attack Mr. Harper as out of touch with the situation of the middle class and
insist tax cuts won’t help – instead offering what he insists are pro-growth policies, such
as spending on infrastructure and education.
While Mr. Mulcair releases his platform to define his persona, Mr. Trudeau will build on
hype with his own campaign gambit, an autobiography. The third party leader, ahead in
the polls, said Saturday he’ll wait till the official campaign to release his platform. It’s his
opponents who will show their cards first.
------------------------------
Cabinet to pitch $6.4-billion surplus,
‘economic bucket’ in multiple files this fall
By LAURA RYCKEWAERT, The Hill Times, September 15, 2014
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Cabinet’s main priority this fall will be the budget and
establishing the Conservative government as a proven, responsible economic steward in
the minds of voters, which will influence everything from the expected $6.4-billion
surplus spending decisions to pipeline negotiations, say Conservatives.
Political observers in Ottawa widely agree the 2015 pre-election period is already
underway, and with the start of what’s expected to be the last full Parliamentary session
before the writ officially drops.
“The single biggest priority is the economy. Always has been, always will be. Anything
economic is going to be top of mind for this government,” said Yaroslav Baran, a former
Conservative Hill staffer and a principal at Earnscliffe Strategy Group.
Cabinet is expected to tackle ongoing concerns over the Temporary Foreign Workers
Program introduced in the spring by Employment and Social Development Minister
Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, Alta.), as well as legislation this fall from Industry
Minister James Moore (Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam, B.C.) to deal with
differences in cross-border pricing between Canada and the U.S.
Mr. Moore has also recently released a discussion paper on interprovincial trade barriers
and Mr. Baran said he’s expecting to hear more discussion around that, as well as
continued trumpeting of the Canada-EU trade deal. As well, Mr. Moore will be busy
implementing the government’s much-touted consumers agenda, said Mr. Baran, which
will in part mean dealing with CRTC deliberations over a pick-and-pay model for TV
subscriptions. Mr. Baran said a priority will also be implementing the Canada-EU trade
agreement and communicating how it will affect Canadians.
“I mean this is a government that rightly prides itself on economic stewardship and
securing a free trade agreement with the world’s largest market containing half a billion
people is a pretty big deal, and should be trumpeted, and I expect it would be,” said Mr.
Baran.
From trumpeting free trade agreements like the Canada-EU deal, to addressing crossborder pricing, Mr. Baran said Cabinet’s “overarching priority” will be the economy and
establishing its economic record.
Over the years in government the Conservative Party has styled itself as a responsible
economic steward, and its slogan, “jobs, growth and long term prosperity,” has been
uttered by caucus members countless times.
A recent teaser ad sent out by the Conservative Party to supporters last week, styled as a
new “positive ad,” focuses on the Conservative government’s economic record and ends
with the tag line, “We’re Better Off With Harper.”
“Notwithstanding all the difficulties and uncertainties in the world, the fundamentals of
our economy are as solid as a rock. There are more Canadians working today than at any
time in the history of this country, that is our record,” says Prime Minister Stephen
Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) in a clip from the video.
While it’s still a long way off for the writ to drop, and the ad makes no specific mention
of an election, it does end with the text, “stand with us.”
This session is also expected to be the last full session before the next federal election is
called—currently set to take place on Oct. 19, 2015—meaning the clock is running out
for legislation to be passed and initiatives to be launched.
Government House Leader Peter Van Loan (York Simcoe, Ont.) told The Hill Times the
government will be focused on passing its Red Tape Reduction Act first thing when
Parliament returns, and said this, as well as a number of crime bills and the budget
implementation bill, will be priorities for the government.
“Our priorities have traditionally been both the economy primarily and secondarily
tackling crime and making communities safer,” said Mr. Van Loan.
Keith Beardsley, president of Cenco Public Affairs and a former PMO deputy chief of
staff for issues management to Mr. Harper, said the Conservative Party’s “mantra” all
along has been that it’s a responsible economic steward, and particularly when it comes
to the challenge posed by the Liberals under leader Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.), he
said “it’s the one area where Harper can hold his record up and say Justin Trudeau hasn’t
done anything.”
“They obviously have to deal with some of the economic issues, especially around the
pipelines. They’ll have other, what I call throw-away issues where they do small criminal
justice bills and this type of thing, but the big issue is going to be the economy,” said Mr.
Beardsley.
“When you’re into an election the last thing you want to do is end up with your job
numbers dropping so they’ll probably be focusing on initiatives that will at least support
where they want to go as far as job numbers,” he said.
Mr. Beardsley said the government will be looking for “any opportunity to promote” its
economic record.
Chad Rogers, a partner at Crestview Strategies who has worked on federal Conservative
election campaigns, also said it will be all about “economic messaging” for the
government this fall, leading up to the budget that will be “the cherry on the sundae.”
“It’s, we hope, going to have tax incentives, debt retirement, infrastructure investments,
all of the things that the Prime Minister and Minister Oliver have been forecasting,” said
Mr. Rogers.
The government is currently faced with a number of outstanding pipelines projects like
the Keystone XL pipeline, which is still awaiting a decision from the U.S. government,
and the Northern Gateway pipeline, which has angered many First Nations communities
in part over resource-sharing agreements and the government’s duty to consult (in
addition to environmental concerns and general environmental opposition to the project).
Mr. Rogers said moving these projects forward will be a priority for the government for
economic reasons.
“That’s all part of jobs and growth, right. The goal there is just do whatever you can to
safely and legally enable those investments to be made,” said Mr. Rogers.
Mr. Rogers said this year’s pre-budget consultations are going to be “more meaningful”
than ever before over the last five years.
“There is now bounty, there is now opportunity and money to use, investments to be
made for us to continue growing the size of the economy, the number of jobs, the amount
of trade we can do. It’s an economic bucket that they’re pitching to voters, to a lesser
extent, law and order,” said Mr. Rogers.
Jim Armour, a vice-president at Summa Strategies and a former Canadian Alliance and
Conservative Party staffer, said it will be important for the government to demonstrate
that it can make good use of its $6.4-billion surplus.
“It’s very easy to spend money but it’s not so easy to spend money well, so the
government’s going to be focusing on where it can get the biggest bang for the buck,”
said Mr. Armour.
“Every single national organization, company, and individual will be making a beeline
for Parliament with a whole list of priorities that the government can finance. People
have been told for years now that, ‘There’s no money, come back later,’ and now they’re
being told that there is going to be a surplus and the government is looking at spending
again. So folks on that [House] Finance Committee, James Rajotte and others, better
prepare themselves, they’re going to be the most popular people on Parliament Hill,” he
said.
Already, Finance Minister Joe Oliver (Eglinton-Lawrence, Ont.) has announced new
measures to try to help the economy. On Sept. 11, Mr. Oliver announced that
Employment Insurance premiums would be reduced for small businesses by about 15 per
cent for 2015 and 2016, which he said will save small businesses about $550-million over
the two years. Mr. Oliver also spoke to the Conservative government’s plans for the
future and said all EI premium rates would be substantially reduced in 2017 when a new,
seven-year break-even rate-setting mechanism is put into effect.
Greg MacEachern, vice president at Environics Communications and a former Liberal
Hill staffer, said he’s expecting the 2015 pre-election campaign to be the longest in
“Canadian history,” and said political observers are all looking to the budget for
indication of the Conservative election platform.
“There’s a lot of pressure and attention around the next budget. We see that with the fact
that the Finance Committee is going to be meeting earlier in terms of pre-budget
consultations,” said Mr. MacEachern.
While pundits are widely expecting Cabinet’s overarching focus to be the economy and
establishing and emphasizing the government’s economic record, critics are challenging
the economic record of the Conservative government.
That Canada has weathered and emerged from the global economic recession in
comparatively better standing internationally-speaking is a widely-accepted narrative, but
there’s much debate over exactly what state Canada’s economy is in, with various experts
looking at different indicators, like job growth, inflation, or the debt-to-GDP ratio, to
form their conclusions.
A total of 42,000 jobs were created in July, according to Statistics Canada’s corrected
July Labour Force Survey, with the national unemployment rate sitting at seven per cent.
“We’ve seen the U.S. far outpacing us along with Europe just in terms of the overall job
creation,” said NDP Finance critic Nathan Cullen (Skeena-Bulkley Valley, B.C.) on
CBC’s Power and Politics on Sept. 11.
“This thing about them being good managers of the economy is absolutely eroded,” he
said.
Robin MacLachlan, a vice-president at Summa Strategies and a former NDP Hill staffer,
said the government’s focus on the economy makes achieving related projects and deals
all the more important and said currently the government has a “narrative” problem.
“This is a government that’s put all its eggs in baskets into extraction of resources, and
it’s stalled. The trickle down this government has preached so much, both in terms of tax
credits for well off Canadians with proposals like income splitting and a resource agenda,
that hasn’t resulted in sustainable growth across the country,” said Mr. MacLachlan.
“It [the government] does have to answer for the sluggish performance, so that will
continue to be its focus and why I think ministers such as [Natural Resources Minister]
Rickford and [Industry Minister] Moore have a tough job ahead of them,” he said.
While most pundits who spoke with The Hill Times said they’re not expecting a Cabinet
shuffle between now and the next election, Mr. Beardsley said he’s expecting at least
“some changes” to the front bench lineup, whether it be a result of current ministers
announcing they won’t run for re-election or a desire from party leadership, to promote
new “stars.”
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ontario court strikes down portion of
federal crime law
SEAN FINE, The Globe and Mail, September 10, 2014
In a strong defence of judicial discretion, the Ontario Court of Appeal has struck down
part of the Truth in Sentencing Act, a centrepiece of the Conservative government’s
tough-on-crime agenda.
The ruling, which directly affects only Ontario, could mean shorter jail terms for
hundreds of prisoners. Adding insult to injury for the government, the 3-0 ruling was
written by the court’s new chief justice, George Strathy, appointed by federal Justice
Minister Peter MacKay in June after the government left the position vacant for an
unprecedented six months.
The government had accused judges of sullying the justice system’s reputation by
granting generous credit to offenders who had spent time behind bars before their trials
began. Since the early 1970s, judges had routinely given those offenders two days in jail
for every day served before sentencing – in recognition of the near-automatic reduction
of jail terms by one-third that offenders receive after sentencing.
With the 2010 Truth in Sentencing Act, the government set one day credit for each day
served as the general rule, and 1.5 days credit where circumstances justify it. But for
offenders who were denied bail primarily because of their criminal record, the act says
they must not be given any extra credit.
The court said this bar to extra credit was unconstitutional because it could mean that
offenders like the man before the court, Hamidreza Safarzadeh-Markhali, spend nearly a
year longer in jail than others who committed a similar crime. Some of those offenders
may have been denied bail because they lacked the social supports to persuade a justice
of the peace that they should be released, Chief Justice Strathy wrote.
“Canadians understand that a sentence must be fair, in all its aspects,” Chief Justice
Strathy wrote. “Public confidence in the criminal justice system would be undermined by
an artificial distinction that results in longer jail terms for some offenders.”
Mr. Safarzadeh-Markhali, who was convicted of smoking marijuana while he drove and
carrying a loaded gun, received six years in prison. He served nearly 21 months in
custody before his sentencing; the trial judge ordered that he be given 31 months credit
for that time. The Ontario government had appealed that ruling.
The appeal court’s ruling was a second devastating blow to the Truth in Sentencing Act.
In April, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that judges could routinely give 1.5 days
credit for each day in pretrial custody, in spite of the government’s argument that the
general rule should be one day counts as one day.
Both the earlier ruling, and this one, were important tests of how far the government
could go to limit judges’ discretion in sentencing. Chief Justice Strathy made it clear that
he took no issue with the government’s wish to make repeat offenders serve longer
periods in jail.
“Unfortunately, however, like many attempts to replace the scalpel of discretion with a
broadsword, its application misses the mark and results in unfairness, discrimination and
ultimately unjust sentences. Instead of ensuring that repeat offenders serve a greater
portion of their custodial sentences, the law targets only those denied bail due to their
previous convictions.”
A spokesman for the Ontario Attorney-General’s department said it was too early to say
whether the government would try to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice Strathy said the law violated the principle of proportionality at the heart of
the Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ Section 7, which protects security of the person.
“That principle is understood and endorsed by all Canadians and is applied in our courts
on a daily basis,” he wrote.
A press secretary for Mr. MacKay said the government was reviewing the decision.
"Canadians expect violent criminals to serve sentences which reflect the severity of their
crimes,” Clarissa Lamb said. “We will continue moving forward with our tough on crime
agenda and support victims of crime despite the opposition parties' efforts to stand in our
way.”
----------------------------
Calcul des peines : autre revers pour
Ottawa
Radio-Canada, le 10 septembre 2014
La Cour d'appel de l'Ontario invalide une autre portion de la réforme du gouvernement
Harper concernant le calcul du temps servi avant la sentence pour réduire la peine finale.
Dans une décision unanime, les trois juges de la Cour d'appel provinciale estiment que les
limites imposées par la loi peuvent faire en sorte que certains détenus passent plus de
temps en prison que d'autres pour un même crime et une même durée de détention avant
procès.
La décision porte plus précisément sur un aspect de la loi qui concerne les demandes de
libération conditionnelle, qui si elles sont refusées en raison du passé criminel d'un
individu, empêche un juge d'accorder un crédit de 1,5 jour par journée de détention avant
la sentence.
« Les Canadiens comprennent qu'une sentence doit être juste dans tous ses aspects », écrit
le juge en chef George Strathy de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario.
La décision a été rendue dans l'affaire de Hamidreza Safarzadeh-Markhali, un Ontarien
reconnu coupable dans une affaire de possession de drogue et d'une arme illégale.
La loi en question, adoptée en 2010, était un élément central du programme conservateur
en matière de justice.
Plus tôt cette année, la Cour suprême du Canada avait confirmé le pouvoir des tribunaux
d'offrir à un accusé, un crédit supplémentaire pour le temps passé en détention avant la
fin des procédures.
----------------------------
Ontario’s legal system too costly and
complicated, new chief justice says
PAOLA LORIGGIO, The Canadian Press. Globe and Mail, Septembre 9, 2014
Ontario’s legal system has grown so expensive and bogged down by red tape that it’s
now inaccessible to many of the people it’s meant to serve, the province’s new top judge
warned on his first full day on the job.
“With the best of intentions, we have designed elaborate rules and practices, engineered
to ensure fairness and achieve just results. But perfection can be the enemy of the good,”
George Strathy told a special sitting of the province’s three courts Tuesday afternoon.
Strathy raised concerns about the “cost, complexity and time it takes to complete legal
proceedings” just a day after his swearing in as Chief Justice of Ontario, in a ceremony to
mark the start of the new court term.
“Having been a lawyer and a judge in this province for over 40 years, it strikes me that
we have built a legal system that has become increasingly burdened by its own
procedures, reaching a point that we have begun to impede the very justice we are
striving to protect,” he said.
Strathy urged every level of court to consider how their practices can be simplified,
streamlined and made more user-friendly.
A spokesman for the Ministry of the Attorney General said it is moving to simplify some
court procedures and expand capacity.
The measures include more use of video conferencing, a pilot project to give counsel
remote access to their clients in the Quinte Detention Centre, and projects to build,
expanding, or significantly renovate 28 courthouses, Brendan Crawley said in an email.
Attorney General Madeleine Meilleur said Monday she looks forward to working with
Strathy “to improve access to justice and to modernize the delivery of legal services and
information.”
Strathy’s message was hailed by the Ontario Bar Association, which represents the
province’s lawyers and judges. The association has been working with the province to
improve access to the justice system, board member Doug Downey said.
“Some procedures are put in place to solve another problem but they create a problem of
their own,” said Downey, a practising lawyer in Barrie, Ont.
“If the chief justice is interested, and he certainly sounds like he is, in reviewing the
system... sort of at a higher level, we may be able to rationalize some of those
procedures,” he said.
The Law Society of Upper Canada, meanwhile, said it is “very concerned about the
decline in people’s ability to access justice across Canada.”
The Law Society, which regulates Ontario’s lawyers and paralegals, said it has
established an Action Group on Access to Justice in an effort to improving access to
justice in the province.
Access to justice issues were also brought forward under Strathy’s predecessor, Warren
Winkler, who retired last year. Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin has
taken up the cause at the national scale, and legal organizations have held conferences
and penned reports on the matter.
Also hampering the justice system is an “acute” need for more courtroom space, Strathy
said — a sentiment echoed by the chief justice of Ontario’s Superior Court, who warned
in her remarks that several communities in the Toronto area lack the facilities “required
to discharge our court’s core functions.”
Heather J. Smith also sounds the alarm over a growing number of judicial vacancies,
saying there will be 30 unfilled positions in Superior Court — about 13 per cent of the
total — by the end of the year if the province doesn’t appoint new judges.
“The seamless filling of judicial vacancies is critical to meeting our court’s obligation to
Ontarians — children and families in particular,” she said, noting 10 of the vacancies will
be in family court.
The head of the Ontario Court of Justice, meanwhile, stressed the need to continue
modernizing the justice system, citing a recent switch to electronic criminal orders
written in “simple, plain language” in courtrooms across the province, as well as a new
online scheduling tool for justices of the peace.
“We plan further modernization through broader use of video conferencing, enhanced
electronic intake opportunities, and the development of a province-wide judicial
scheduling tool,” Annemarie E. Bonkalo said in a statement.
Ontario’s courts face “significant” challenges, Strathy said, “but they are not
unsurmountable.”
-------------------------------------
Aucune politique sur le vapotage pour
les fonctionnaires fédéraux
JOËL-DENIS BELLAVANCE, La Presse, le 10 septembre 2014
Alors que des élus de Montréal jonglent avec l'idée d'interdire la cigarette électronique
dans les espaces publics, le gouvernement fédéral hésite à imposer la ligne dure aux
employés qui souhaitent consommer ce nouveau produit sur les lieux de travail.
Dans certains ministères, des employés « utilisent ou aimeraient utiliser » des cigarettes
électroniques au sein de leur milieu de travail, selon des informations glanées par La
Presse au cours des derniers jours.
Or, l'utilisation de ce produit qui gagne en popularité semble embêter le gouvernement
fédéral. La Loi sur la santé des non-fumeurs touche uniquement les produits de tabagisme
et non les cigarettes électroniques.
Au Conseil du Trésor, une porte-parole, Kelly James, confirme qu'il n'existe « aucune
politique précise [...] qui interdit l'utilisation de cigarettes sans fumée ou électroniques ».
Elle ajoute toutefois que « le Secrétariat du Conseil du Trésor ne recommande pas l'usage
de ces produits en milieu de travail puisqu'ils peuvent présenter des risques pour la santé
et n'ont pas été pleinement évalués sur le plan de l'innocuité, de la qualité et de l'efficacité
par Santé Canada ».
Pour l'heure, il incombe aux sous-ministres de chaque ministère de s'assurer que la santé
et la sécurité des employés ne sont pas mises en péril dans leur lieu de travail. « Les
employés qui ont des préoccupations ou des plaintes à formuler au sujet de la qualité de
l'air ou encore des réactions allergiques à certaines odeurs ou à certains aliments dans leur
milieu de travail devraient communiquer avec leur superviseur qui assurera le suivi et
recommandera une solution appropriée », a précisé Mme James dans un courriel envoyé à
La Presse.
Un danger, selon l'OMS
Récemment, l'Organisation mondiale de la santé a exhorté les gouvernements à adopter
de nouvelles mesures législatives pour formellement interdire la vente de cigarettes
électroniques aux mineurs et leur consommation dans les endroits publics et les lieux de
travail intérieurs. Selon l'OMS, la cigarette électronique représente un danger pour la
santé publique au même titre que les produits du tabac. Mais certains experts ont contesté
les conclusions de l'OMS dans les jours qui ont suivi la publication d'un rapport sur le
sujet.
À Québec, Jean Auclair, conseiller en communication au Secrétariat du Conseil du
Trésor, a indiqué que l'on recommande aux ministères de refuser systématiquement toute
demande d'employé pour utiliser la cigarette électronique.
« Ce produit n'est pas réglementé par Santé Canada et aucune disposition légale n'encadre
de manière générale l'utilisation de la cigarette électronique. Lorsque le Secrétariat du
Conseil du Trésor est interpellé dans son rôle de gouverne par les ministères et
organismes, ce dernier recommande de refuser l'usage de la cigarette électronique sur les
lieux du travail », a précisé M. Auclair, soulignant au passage que plusieurs organismes
comme Santé Canada et le ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux ont émis des
mises en garde contre l'utilisation de ce produit.
À Montréal, le conseiller municipal Marvin Rotrand compte déposer une motion à la
réunion du conseil municipal du 15 septembre afin d'interdire la cigarette électronique
dans les espaces publics où l'on proscrit déjà le tabagisme. Sa collègue Elsie Lefebvre
appuie cette motion. « Comme il y a un flou, on pense que c'est mieux de réglementer,
même si on ne connaît pas l'effet concret sur la santé », a-t-elle récemment déclaré à
Radio-Canada.
------------------------------
Former Supreme Court justice shares
advice as she embarks on the next
phase of her career
SEAN FINE, Justice Writer, The Globe and Mail, September 8, 2014
At 67, after an extraordinary, globe-hopping career, Louise Arbour has come home to
Montreal after working outside of Quebec since 1971. Once again, she is setting out to do
something she has never done before – she has joined a law firm.
She has been a Supreme Court judge, an international prosecutor of war crimes and the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. But the toughest challenge Ms.
Arbour says she ever faced came at the very beginning, when as a young Québécois law
student she moved to Ontario, first to be a law clerk at the Supreme Court in Ottawa, and
then, a law professor in Toronto.
On the occasion of joining Borden Ladner Gervais as counsel, she spoke to The Globe
and Mail’s Sean Fine about her craving for learning, why she left the Supreme Court of
Canada after just five years and her advice for young people.
Q: What was the biggest hurdle you had to overcome to succeed in your career?
Ms. Arbour: When I look back, the biggest move for me was to move from Quebec to
Ontario. I went to be a law clerk in the Supreme Court of Canada when I barely spoke
English. Everything after that was a repetition of the same kind of effort to understand.
Within a couple of years I was teaching at Osgoode Hall Law School. It’s pretty obvious
with hindsight that I crave the environment where there’s a lot of figuring out how it all
works.
Q: We take those moves for granted now. Why was that first move to Ontario so
challenging?
Ms. Arbour: I’d never studied in English in my life. I went to a classical college and then
to law school, all in French. Osgoode Hall Law School, coming from Quebec in those
days, was like Harvard: this huge, impressive English-speaking common-law
establishment. I had a civil law degree; I spoke French. And of course, these were at the
times of intense nationalist if not separatist aspirations in Quebec. Nowadays, the country
has become much more bilingual and more fluid. When I look back at my law school
[University of Montreal], I don’t think anybody else left. Maybe one or two went to New
York. It was very bold. In retrospect, it allowed me to find comfort and even attraction in
novelty, challenge, stepping into things for which I was not particularly well-qualified.
Q: That’s a rare characteristic. Where did it come from?
Ms. Arbour: I have no idea. You are talking to someone who is enormously not
introspectful. I have very little insight and not a great deal of interest in analyzing my
inner drive.
Q: What was the main skill that all these tough, diverse jobs of yours demanded?
Ms. Arbour: The ability to think from first principles and not to get lost in the details. I
led a team of prosecutors from the United States, Denmark, Italy. They came from
different legal systems. The U.S. guys who mastered the federal rules of evidence were
often the ones that you had to shake from the details of the rules and say – think of this
unique environment in which we are operating.
Q: What was the Supreme Court ruling you wrote that you’re proudest of?
Ms. Arbour: There’s a convention when you leave the court that you don’t comment on
your judgments or the work of others. I think maybe the one that stayed in my mind was
a dissent I wrote in Gosselin in Quebec on the right to welfare. It was my first
introduction really to economic and social rights and their alleged absence from the
framework of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It was very novel, very
challenging.
Q: Why do you say the alleged absence of social and economic rights?
Ms. Arbour: I wrote in Gosselin that Section 7, the right to life, liberty and security of the
person, is the foundation of all rights. Not only civil and political rights but also
economic, social and cultural rights. In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
they’re all united. It’s only after the Cold War and the 70s that there was a big fracture
where the West embraced civil liberties, civil and political rights, and developing
countries, China and Russia purported to prefer social and economic rights – the right to
health, the right to education. I came to the conclusion that these rights are there, if you
read the Charter in the full spirit and the full heritage on which it is built. Obviously this
was not the prevailing view and still isn’t, I think.
Q: Why did you leave the Supreme Court of Canada after just five years?
Ms. Arbour: I got a call from Kofi Annan to whom I originally I said no. I told him I
can’t, I have a lifetime assignment. And then three months later I accepted. It would have
never occurred to me to leave the Supreme Court except for something that was a once in
a lifetime opportunity to go back into a system that at least I understood better than when
I went the first time. Under the leadership of someone I knew would support me. I was
quite young, I had many years ahead [on the Supreme Court] but it was in keeping with
other things I’ve done.
Q: Who were the biggest influences on your career?
Ms. Arbour: There were not a lot of people I would identify with, i.e. women. My law
professors were all men. My early colleagues at the law school and on the bench were all
men. It’s hard for me to think of them as mentors, although it’s very clear that it’s a series
of men, for the most part, who were very supportive. A couple of my law professors –
some are dead now – at the University of Montreal. Harry Arthurs, who was the dean at
Osgoode – why on earth he offered me a job to this day completely baffles me. Charley
Dubin [former chief justice of Ontario]. William Parker, who was chief justice of the high
court. I was maybe the third woman on the court, French-speaking, not even FrancoOntarien. Antonio Lamer, the chief justice of Canada, had been my criminal law
professor. Kofi Annan. I’ve developed a lot of women friends, mostly peers, younger
women, law clerks, former students, people I’ve worked with internationally. There’s not
a person who stands out as my beacon.
Q: Which one of your jobs did you enjoy most?
Ms. Arbour: I loved them all. I never left a job because I was bored or didn’t like the
environment. In my judicial career, the Court of Appeal for Ontario was a dream
environment. It was a very collegial court, a very strong court, on criminal law which
interested me and on commercial matters, with people like Syd Robins and Allan
Goodman. There was a pace of work that is faster than the Supreme Court. I liked the
trial work as well. I was only a trial judge for a couple of years. When the call comes and
they ask you to go the Court of Appeal – in a sense I wished they had called a couple of
years later. I was just starting to get it, to preside at jury trials. It was immensely
rewarding.
When the dust all settles, I think the work I did as an international prosecutor was
probably the best combination of theory, getting the principles right, and then strategic
work – it was very operational which was not like anything I’ve really done before. And
of course it was anchored in all kinds of politics. It was a witches brew of all kinds of
fascinating things. But under conditions that I wouldn’t wish on anybody. In a sense, it’s
not real. You can’t do that forever, especially in the early days when the whole thing was
very precarious and experimental.
Q: You spoke up publicly against the PQ government’s proposed charter of values
limiting religious symbols in the public service last year. Why did you decide to
enter the debate?
Ms. Arbour: I was coming back home, in a sense, and this was a pretty fundamental issue
on which as a citizen I thought I was certainly entitled to an opinion. It was really
important to me, the kind of climate to which I was returning. And frankly, I was just
appalled at the tone and the content of the voices supporting this charter.
Q: What is the number-one human rights issue in the world today?
Ms. Arbour: As a human rights lawyer the instinct is to say all rights are equal, there is no
hierarchy of rights. Still, inequality captures not just the whole umbrella of discrimination
but also economic disparities that are unjustifiable on any terms, between countries and
within countries.
Q: Speaking to law students, or any audience of young people, what would you say
is the lesson of your success?
Ms. Arbour: If I were talking to law students, I would say to them, because it was such a
revelation to me, particularly when I became a trial judge: it’s all about the facts. If you
get the facts straight so many things follow quite naturally. And yet the ascertainment of
historical facts – by historical, I mean, something that happened yesterday – big events,
small events – is an extremely difficult enterprise, even in an era where we’re supposed
to know everything. To young people, I think I would say, do not be discouraged because
you can not pick every good fight. But pick a few.
Q: What are you going to do as counsel at Borden Ladner Gervais?
Ms. Arbour: It’s very early. We’ll see what’s ahead for both of us, for the firm and for
me. This is a firm I’ve known through its litigation work for many years. I could
contribute on some of their litigation files, some of their arbitration issues. I have some of
my own work that I will carry on doing, which for me will be much more useful to do it
in a professional environment than in total isolation. I’m a member of something called
the Global Commission on Drug Policy, and the Global commission on the Death Penalty
– prior commitments. The most important one, the one that persuaded me that I would be
much more comfortable working back in a law firm – I’ve been appointed an ad hoc
judge of the International Court of Justice in a case between Bolivia and Chile. I’m only
sitting on that one case. It’s just a lot easier for me to work not in total isolation.
Bolivia is suing Chile alleging an obligation on the part of Chile to negotiate their access
to the Pacific Ocean. The court has 17 permanent members. But when there is a case
between countries that don’t have one of their nationals on the court, each country can
nominate a judge to sit ad hoc. I was nominated by Chile.
Q: Any chance you’ll write your memoirs?
Ms. Arbour: The past doesn’t really interest me very much. The future interests me. The
present is top of the list. I’m always intensely engaged in what I’m doing and I’m very
forward-looking. It would be so laborious for me to try to dig in, particularly if I had any
pretense of being accurate. I have actually given every scrap of paper, every photo,
everything I own to the national archives, and good luck, my friend, if you ever wanted to
dig into that. I have enormous admiration for historians and journalists. That’s not me.
Career highlights
1971-1972: Served as law clerk for Justice Louis-Philippe Pigeon, Supreme Court of
Canada
1972: Worked as researcher for Law Reform Commission
1975-87: Taught at York University’s Osgoode Hall Law School
1987-90: Appointed judge on Ontario High Court
1990-96: Appointed judge on Ontario Court of Appeal
1995: Appointed single Commissioner for inquiry into the Prison for Women in Kingston
1996-1999: Appointed by UN Security Council as chief prosecutor for the International
Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda
1999-2004: Appointed judge of the Supreme Court of Canada
2004-2008: Appointed UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
2009-2014: Served as president and chief executive officer of International Crisis Group
2014: Counsel for Borden Ladner Gervais law firm, Montreal
Personal: Mother of three adult children and grandmother of three
---------------------------------------------------
Why better public pensions are on the
way: Mayers
There’s a big divide between Ottawa and Queen’s Park on how to improve pensions
and retirement security. Either way, change is coming.
By Adam Mayers Personal Finance Editor, Toronto Star, September 10, 2014
The big divide between the provincial Liberals and federal Conservatives on the way to
improve pensions and retirement security is a tale of two ideologies.
It will make for interesting times next fall as Canada goes to the polls in a federal
election. If the Conservatives win, Ontario will go it alone with its own version of the
Canada Pension Plan. But if the Liberals or NDP hold the balance of power, things get
interesting. Expanding the Canada Pension Plan becomes a possibility and so Ontario
doesn’t need to build a costly Ontario Retirement Pension Plan (ORPP) from scratch.
The ideological differences are very clear.
The Federal Conservatives’ view is that Canadians don’t need help to save. The Canada
Pension Plan offers a good start and what we need is a bit more discipline to take
advantage of available tax breaks. If you don’t have a company pension, it’s up to you to
set something aside in your Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP). Put a little more
into your Tax Free Savings Account (TFSA). Try the recently introduced Pooled
Registered Pension Plans (PRPPs) .
The Ontario Liberals see three million middle-income Ontarians who aren’t saving
enough, at a time when company pension plans are disappearing. Either they won’t, or
can’t save, given the day-to-day commitments of mortgages, car loans and school extra
curriculars.
The Liberals say you can pretend otherwise, but tax incentives aren’t working and
middle-income earners are in a bind. So the best way forward for those who do not have a
company pension is through the ORPP. Yes, it is a forced saving, but it is your money,
not a tax and creates a benefit that on retirement will be similar to the CPP.
That’s where things stand.
When thinking about do-it-yourself retirement versus a pension plan here are three
ways that pension plans come out ahead:
The cheque is always there : Stock markets rise and fall. If you had the misfortune to
retire in 2008 or 2009, your outlook and sense of security suddenly changed. U.S. share
prices dropped 54 per cent between Jan., 2007 and March, 2009. Canadians shares
somewhat less. What to do? Something? Nothing? Stay working? Take Valium?
The answer was do nothing. Five years later markets are testing new highs. Pension funds
with the luxury of time, just waited it out.
Don Raymond, chief investment strategist for the CPP Investment Board (CPPIB) made
the point in an interview last year: “When [we] talk quarters, we’re not talking three
months, but a quarter of a century,” he said. “That allows us to live through ups and
downs.”
Lower costs: Fees are a killer when it comes to investment returns and the bigger the
pool of money, the lower the cost. The average mutual fund management fee is 2 per cent
of assets. Jim Keohane, CEO of Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP), which
covers 286,000 people in the province, says HOOPP’s fee is 30 basis points, or less than
a third of 1 per cent, to manage $51.6 billion in assets.
That makes a huge difference over time.
If you invest $100 and the fee is 2 per cent, it costs $2 a year. If the fund’s profit is 5 per
cent, or $5 a year, you’re left with a gain of $3.
If you invest the same $100, but the fee is 0.30 per cent, that’s 30 cents a year. You keep
$4.70, or 56 per cent more.
Lower risk : One of the stresses of retirement planning is figuring out how much you
you’ll need to live comfortably and how not to outlive your resources. But how long will
you live. Will it be 75 or 95? Who knows.
It could be well beyond that. Keohane says HOOPP has 52 pensioners who are over 100.
Pension plan members sleep easy because they get a cheque for as long as they live.
Their pension plans spread the longevity risk over tens of thousands of members.
“[With a pension fund] you know you’ll never run out of money,” Keohane says. “On
your own you have to assume you’re one of those people who will live to 100. You don’t
want to run out of money when you’re 90.”
Keohane is one of the experts advising the Ontario government on their plan, and
believes that one way or another, enhancement of public pensions is coming.
“I think people are awaiting the outcome of the federal election next year,” he says. “The
Conservatives have indicated that they won’t expand CPP and the other parties probably
would. So it all depends on who wins.”
Ontario’s Pension Plan at a glance
When does it start ? Jan. 1, 2017
Who’s covered? 3 million Ontarians without company plans must join.
What will it cost? 1.9% of earnings to a maximum annual income of $90,000,
matched by employers. For example, a $60,000 earner pays $95 a month.
What do I get? A payment roughly equal to your CPP pension.
Who invests the money? The $3.5 billion collected each year, will be invested at
arm’s length to the Ontario government to be free of political interference.
Where will it be invested? In stocks, bonds, real estate and infrastructure around
the world.